Buying a house - No certificate of compliance with building regulations

I did not misunderstand your questions.

You stated as follows:-

• 1. Even if there was no visible signs of subsidence when the survey was done?
• 2. You misunderstood the question, there were no visible signs for the surveyor to see when the survey was done.
• 3. They may not have appeared for a year or so subsequent to buying the house.

You described a hypothetical scenario that a CP Surveys a house in good condition and furnished a Structural Survey Report which does not report any structural damage to the house.

You indicate that they were no signs of Subsidence on the day the CP carried out the Survey, and that signs of Subsidence appeared subsequently after approximately 1 year.

This confirms that there was no Subsidence to the Building on the day the survey was conducted. No visible signs of subsidence means no subsidence.

I described what an experienced CP would do.

The CP will have many high resolution photos of each elevation and window/door opes etc. This will be indisputable photographic proof that there were no visible cracks in the house and no evidence of Subsidence on the day of the Survey.

The CP will have many photos of the water level in the manholes of the drains, which include his wrist watch to show the time intervals. Therefore the drains are not leaking on the day of the Survey.

The CP will be able to prove that there was no visible signs or possible cause of subsidence, by leaking drains, on the date of the Survey.

The CP is not negligent and can prove same.

A CP must protect himself by taking photographic proof of the building at the time of the Survey. The CP is legally obliged by the PI Insurance company to retain all the photos etc for at least 6 years.

You never describe what caused the Hypothetical Subsidence subsequent to the Survey of the house which had no visible signs of cracking and watertight drains etc.

@mickdw had explained it succinctly enough in plain English, but thank you.

mickdw succinct explanation never identified the most important fact of all - “the cause of the rapid Subsidence”.

Perhaps your good self or mickdw can now explain to me - what caused a mature house in a good structural condition, and with watertight drains to end up with subsidence within 12 months.

What caused the hypothetical subsidence????

Please inform me.

A hypothetical scenario could perhaps be a major water main burst adjacent to house, washing out foundations.

My point was that for such damage to occur in a short period of time would almost certainly require external event and that this event would be known and documented and therefore not a case of negligence on behalf of the surveyor.

You are slightly preoccupied with watertight drains I feel.

What caused the hypothetical subsidence????

Thats what you get for asking ridiculous questions, and as usual cannot handle the truth.

A Watermain is not a Drain

They are totally different water pipe

You stated above:-

“You are slightly preoccupied with watertight drains I feel.”

That would be a brilliant reply in the High Court to a Senior Counsel. It’s so funny.

Most claims for negligence against incompetent house Survey Reports are against incompetent Surveyors because of unreported leaking drains.

Most subsidence of buildings are caused by escape of water from leaking drains.

Expert Experienced Surveyors always carry out a hydrostatic test on all the drains.

A Foul water drain and a Surface water drain are Drains.

It's only you who has locked in on drainage leaks.

I presented a hypothetical situation of a burst water main (yes I know this is not a drain) adjacent to a house causing wash out of soil at or below foundation level resulting in rapidly developing subsidence.

That's an example just for **** and giggles. We were actually arguing the same side but you seem to have gone off on a tangent about water tight drains.

I think you will find I gave a pretty comprehensive direct response to that question from my own 1st hand experience of issuing such certs retrospectively.

Had this problem 2 years ago when I bought. The garage was converted into a 2nd living room, for probably a cash in hand job at the time of construction. There was never a certificate of completion done. Luckily our solicitor caught it.

It's not a big delay, maybe about a week if all parties are working at the same speed. It's a quick job that an architect/engineer/QS usually comes in checked the building has been completed to the correct standard and writes a report. Cost circa e500. An expense for the seller. It's one of those jobs you should get checked off asap because the day you want it, it will be annoying to get.

Our estate agent was an a-hole, blamed it on me and wanted to know what it had to do with him. The ludder should have spotted it first and advised the seller to get it sorted before it went on the market.

It's not a big job but it's a pain if everyone wants a smooth transaction.

Hi ,

Was reading through this post and I'm wondering if you could offer any advice on an issue I've come across while purchasing a house. We engaged the services of a surveyor to give us a certificate of compliance as the vendors solicitor insisted this was not needed. However the surveyor was only able to give us an Opinion on Compliance as there were a number of additions to the house ( extension, conservatory, some sheds in the garden) that did not have planning permission and in total exceeded the allowed 23m2. Will this be an issue when attempting to draw down a mortgage? Also is this a situation where it is reasonable to ask to renegotiate price as we will have to either demolish some of these or apply for retention.? Any advice appreciated! Thanks